[1.2] Real Solar System v12.0 Dec 8

[p3asant]

let's take a look at your output_log.txt file and see if there's any other errors before this happens.

Well i uploaded a couple output_logs if you'd like to take a look at them.

Here

[KhaosCorp]

Sorry for being 'that guy'...but kinda lost track of this thread after page 10 or so......oops =/

Im wondering how stable this is, and what kinda RAM usage are people seeing when loaded.

Also kinda curious how many use this with current engine specs....or is it required to use more realistic engines (as far as performance goes that is)?

[Guest]

RAM stays unchanged, this mod doesn't add anything. As for engines, you're free to use stock ones. Just remember that your Jool rocket might become your orbital launcher that way. MFS and FAR help with this.

[KhaosCorp]

RAM stays unchanged, this mod doesn't add anything. As for engines, you're free to use stock ones. Just remember that your Jool rocket might become your orbital launcher that way. MFS and FAR help with this.

Yea I kinda figured that, but the challenge would be fun I think. Plus, since Ferram released the KJR mod I have been able to get some rockets of just silly size and power off the pad.

I dont really understand how FAR would help with this, does it not still effect the physics the same?

Personally I dont use FAR....its great mod and all, but I kinda suck at making in atmo planes with stock physics.......FAR is for people that know alot more about aerodynamics than me =)

ALSO.....(sorry, ill stop asking in a min =P) does MFS mod cover just stock parts, or does it work with popular mods (mainly KW...can live without it!)

Edited November 16, 2013 by KhaosCorp

[SFJackBauer]

Adding to the above answer, and since I like scientific measurements, I did measure the RAM usage compared to the stock game.

I assume the minimum set of mods required to play is:

- RealSolarSystem

- MFS

- StretchyTanks

- FAR

- KJR

I did a "path" of:

- Enter the game, create a sandbox save

- Open Tracking Station, cycle through all bodies

- Open VAB, open Kerbal X, go to the launch pad

Stock game:

- Ended up at 1.67GB, peaked at 1.67GB

Modded game:

- Ended up at 1.7GB, peaked at 1.72GB

So you're seeing an increase, in the above conditions, of only 50MB.

I dont really understand how FAR would help with this, does it not still effect the physics the same?

Personally I dont use FAR....its great mod and all, but I kinda suck at making in atmo planes with stock physics.......FAR is for people that know alot more about aerodynamics than me =)

Standard Kerbin atmosphere is soupy, so Earth-sized atmosphere is even more soupier. FAR makes the atmosphere as thin as it is in real life. Besides, FAR does not affect much rocket handling as long as you make a reasonable rocket (e.g. not abusing on asparagus, putting nose cones in the front etc).

Edited November 16, 2013 by SFJackBauer

[Guest]

In theory, you don't need StretchyTanks. The game will be harder without them, but not impossibly so. You can make a stock-part only rocket that will make orbit and maybe the Mun with RSS. Anything further may be possible with on-orbit docking, but it will be very, very hard.

[Istas]

I too am having the solar panel problems mentioned by others; their output goes up and down several times when going from near the sun to far from the sun, and often goes into negative so the solar panels will drain batteries. I can provide a profile of the highs and lows if it would help.

I've created a copy of stock KSP and then installed -only- RSS (redownloading v5.1 today just to make sure, even though I was already using that) to test this, and it still happens (using a single 1x6 solar panel for test, since that's what I have most of on the vehicle I noticed the problems in, in the group of realism mods I'm using). Changing the RealSolarSystemSettings.cfg does not seem to alter this behavior; I've tried removing the // so the second two numbers aren't commented out, tried the fix posted by Sternface in post #746 on this thread, tried making first only two and then only one key under the power curve heading, and none of them changed the behavior of the solar panels.

Also, really great work so far! This along with real fuels, FAR, deadly reentry, etc. have really captivated my interest through new challenge. ~17000 dV to get back from the Mun's surface, with actual incentive not to use direct ascent? Yes please!

Edited November 16, 2013 by Istas

[Sternface]

Edit: Another thought (because I'm not sure I buy that they are using int32 in there) is it possible that the panels are just not producing enough at extreme range and we're just seeing normal drain from components?

I suspected this at first, but clicking on the solar panels revealed that their energy flow was positive, thus consuming power rather than producing it.

Istas, I made a mistake in my post. Here are the exact changed that I made. [i altered the keys #2, #6, and #7, as well as what I think are the exponential modifiers.]

(The first is the original, the second contains the changes I made)

{
	powerCurve
	{
		key = 0 223.8 //0 -0.5
		key = [COLOR="#FF0000"]5790910000[/COLOR] 6.6736 [COLOR="#B22222"]//-0.5 -0.5[/COLOR]
		key = 108208000000 1.9113 [COLOR="#B22222"]//-0.5 -0.5[/COLOR]
		key = 149598261000 1.0 [COLOR="#B22222"]//-0.1 -0.1[/COLOR]
		key = 227939100000 0.431 [COLOR="#B22222"]//-.03 -.03[/COLOR]
		key = [COLOR="#B22222"]778547200000[/COLOR] 0.037 [COLOR="#B22222"]//-.01 -.001[/COLOR]
		key = [COLOR="#B22222"]5874000000000[/COLOR] 0 [COLOR="#B22222"]//-0.001[/COLOR] 0
	}
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

{
	powerCurve
	{
		key = 0 223.8 //0 -0.5
		key = [COLOR="#0000CD"]579091000000[/COLOR] 6.6736 [COLOR="#0000CD"]0 0[/COLOR]
		key = 108208000000 1.9113[COLOR="#0000CD"] 0 0[/COLOR]
		key = 149598261000 1.0 [COLOR="#0000CD"]0 0[/COLOR]
		key = 227939100000 0.431 [COLOR="#0000CD"]0 0[/COLOR]
		key = [COLOR="#0000CD"]5778547200000[/COLOR] 0.037 [COLOR="#0000CD"]0 0[/COLOR]
		key = [COLOR="#0000CD"]10874000000000[/COLOR] 0 [COLOR="#0000CD"]0[/COLOR] 0
	}

My bad for the mixup. Hope his works for yah!

Edited November 16, 2013 by Sternface

[Starwaster]

I suspected this at first, but clicking on the solar panels revealed that their energy flow was positive, thus consuming power rather than producing it.

You mean negative right?

Either way I think I know what the problem is with them. Doing some testing right now.

Will post more shortly.

[NathanKell]

That's actually the question I've always wanted to ask you [ferram] - why don't you add heat modelling to FAR directly? The heat during supersonic flight is not just about reentry, it just make sence to me. Does it for you?

Heh, interesting you should say that. That is ialdabaoth's confirmed desire, and mine too. :]

(And, ferram, was going to be the gist of the PM I was going to send )

Regarding solar panels: I think I found the bug. I was not resetting the floatcurve before loading the new one. That might be the source of the errors.

Yea I kinda figured that, but the challenge would be fun I think. Plus, since Ferram released the KJR mod I have been able to get some rockets of just silly size and power off the pad.

I dont really understand how FAR would help with this, does it not still effect the physics the same?

Personally I dont use FAR....its great mod and all, but I kinda suck at making in atmo planes with stock physics.......FAR is for people that know alot more about aerodynamics than me =)

ALSO.....(sorry, ill stop asking in a min =P) does MFS mod cover just stock parts, or does it work with popular mods (mainly KW...can live without it!)

Questions good.

As SFJackBauer says, the stock atmosphere is a soupy thing that doesn't behave realistically at all, forces you to make really weird ascent profiles, and doesn't properly (or at all, really) model drag, for rockets or for planes.

Even if you're only flying rockets, FAR is an absolute must-have.

And regarding planes--I couldn't do anything with them stock either, but FAR actually makes them behave like planes, so I've found spaceplane making ridiculously easy once I installed FAR. It's not at all just for people who know aerodynmaics; indeed, it's often most helpful for people who don't, because planes that "look" like they should fly generally do, which can't be said for stock.

MFS does indeed support almost all popular (and some not very well known!) mods. It certainly supports KW. There's two main reasons to use MFS with RSS: first, it gives you realistic mass ratios and performance; for example, KSP engines mass about 3-4x what they should, and tanks somewhere between double and 10x what they should for how much fuel they hold. Second, it gives you specific impulse in line with reality. Kerosene-Liquid Oxygen is the "standard" fuel, as in real life, and has Isp on the order of 340 seconds (more for vacuum-optimized closed-cycle engines); KSP generally has vacuum (and ESPECIALLY) sea level Isp too high. It alos, however, lets you use hydrogen-LOx engines, with realistic Isps (order of 450 seconds vacuum), which makes a big difference. Though note that since hydrogen is very very very not dense, you'll need BIG tanks full of the stuff.

[Sternface]

You mean negative right?

Either way I think I know what the problem is with them. Doing some testing right now.

Will post more shortly.

Err, whichever one means they drain power

I got mixed up since the electric charge shows as negative on the resource panel when it is charging.

P.S. While I got you're attention, I wanted to thank both you and NathanKell for all the hard work you do here Really amazing stuff. My KSP experience improved 1̶0̶.̶6̶2̶ 10.618333333333333333333333333333 times from vanilla.

P.P.S. Not to mention every single other modder.

Edited November 16, 2013 by Sternface

[iVG]

My KSP experience improved 10.62 times from vanilla.

Are the decimals necessary

[Sternface]

Are the decimals necessary

Well, E̶a̶r̶t̶h̶ Kerbin is now 1̶0̶.̶6̶2̶ 10.618333333333333333333333333333 times larger, and now has proper fuels to allow proper functionality

Edited November 16, 2013 by Sternface

[Starwaster]

Are the decimals necessary

I'm more concerned about the fact that he rounded. I was looking for at least 4 decimal places of accuracy!

[iVG]

By the way, after putting all the bodies in place, resized and all that, what are the plans for v6 of the mod?

[ferram4]

That's actually the question I've always wanted to ask you - why don't you add heat modelling to FAR directly? The heat during supersonic flight is not just about reentry, it just make sence to me. Does it for you?

Primarily because the first versions of Deadly Reentry came out before I could add heating to FAR, and because I didn't want people running both to have double-heating going on. There was also the issue where my first forays into heating either resulted in rockets overheating 5 seconds after liftoff or being able to survive anything. I can look into adding what Deadly Reentry does to FAR, but I would expect somewhat bad things to happen if I did that. Before that I want to actually model the differing compositions of atmospheres (currently FAR assumes everywhere is 78% N2, 21% O2, 1% other).

[Sternface]

BTW, what DR Continued heat modifier do you all use? I used 10, but I recently updated this, FAR, and DR Continued and for some reason peak at around 500-600 degrees when coming in at near-orbital velocities. (specifically, after lowering my Pe to 20km from a 130km circular orbit.)

And while I'm thanking modders, thank you ferram for your awesome work!

[NathanKell]

ferram, I for one would be very happy if you added heating to FAR; I think it would work much more smoothly that way (and honestly my plate is super-full with this and MFS and...)

But then again your plate is pretty full too, so whatever you think.

iVG: Getting planetary terrain to match NASA imagery of the planets.

[Istas]

Istas, I made a mistake in my post. Here are the exact changed that I made.

Thanks for the update, but this doesn't seem to work either. I still get solar panel drain at 87.8 Gm, and the other places don't seem to have changed either. (I am assuming that power curve information is not stored in quicksaves, which is what I've been using to test this; I haven't been able to find it in the quicksave file).

Additionally, from what NathanKell posted about the bug, it sounds like the cause is not fixable just in the .cfg. It is curious that your fix worked for you and not for me though.

[NathanKell]

Sternface: I use all stock modifiers in DREC. I just use the updated heat shields. That means that [almost] anything unshielded burns up, quite properly.

[Sternface]

^

Thanks. I'll try setting it back to 25. Avoiding burn-up is half the fun.

Thanks for the update, but this doesn't seem to work either. I still get solar panel drain at 87.8 Gm, and the other places don't seem to have changed either. (I am assuming that power curve information is not stored in quicksaves, which is what I've been using to test this; I haven't been able to find it in the quicksave file).

Additionally, from what NathanKell posted about the bug, it sounds like the cause is not fixable just in the .cfg. It is curious that your fix worked for you and not for me though.

Yes, that is weird. I was just at Pluto last night with those changes and they worked fine.

Sorry I couldn't be of help.

Edited November 16, 2013 by Sternface

[metaphor]

Well I just tried aerobraking in Jool/Jupiter's atmosphere. The temperature didn't go above 1000 C at any point, it was the g-forces about 1/3 of the way down that destroyed the spacecraft at more than 15g sustained. It is a little odd how as soon as you hit the top of the atmosphere you get full blast re-entry effects with 1g+ of deceleration instantly. But I'm guessing that has to do with KSP's handling of least dense possible atmosphere as 0.00001 of sea-level atmosphere. Eve/Venus seemed a lot more realistic, maybe because the speed at atmospheric entry is so much lower.

[iVG]

Sternface: I use all stock modifiers in DREC. I just use the updated heat shields. That means that [almost] anything unshielded burns up, quite properly.

Pardon me again, what values do you use for heat shields (+Shockmultiplier 1.17?) ?

[NathanKell]

Shock multiplier (and shock _exponent_, for which the 1.17 value was bandied about) is ONLY for using NON-rescaled Kerbin.

If you're using that NKReal archive, you already have correct heat shield for the Mk1 Pod (built in) and the Mk1-2 Pod (the 4m heatshield).

[Istas]

I just noticed your request for screenshots, so here are some. The last one is from the mission where my solar panels keep dying, in this case both at solar Pe and also at the Dres intersect. I'm hanging on to that quicksave as I'm not willing to give up all that science!

Javascript is disabled. View full album